Maria Rosaria De Pascale1, Angela Belsito2, Linda Sommese3, Simona Signoriello4, Antonio Sorriento5, Maria Vasco6, Concetta Schiano7, Carmela Fiorito6, Giuseppe Durevole6, Marina Casale8, Silverio Perrotta8, Fiorina Casale8, Roberto Alfano9, Giuditta Benincasa7, Giovanni Francesco Nicoletti10, Claudio Napoli7. 1. UOC Divisione di Immunologia Clinica, Immunoematologia, Medicina Trasfusionale e Immunologia dei Trapianti, Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialistica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy - Equal contribution - Present address Ospedale "Cardarelli", Naples, Italy. 2. UOC Divisione di Immunologia Clinica, Immunoematologia, Medicina Trasfusionale e Immunologia dei Trapianti, Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialistica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy - Equal contribution. 3. UOC Divisione di Immunologia Clinica, Immunoematologia, Medicina Trasfusionale e Immunologia dei Trapianti, Dipartimento di Medicina Sperimentale, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 4. Dipartimento di Salute Mentale e Medicina Preventiva, Statistica, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 5. AORN dei Colli - Ospedale "Monaldi", Naples, Italy. 6. UOC Divisione di Immunologia Clinica, Immunoematologia, Medicina Trasfusionale e Immunologia dei Trapianti, Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialistica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 7. Dipartimento di Scienze Cliniche e Chirurgiche Avanzate, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 8. Dipartimento della Donna, del Bambino e di Chirurgia Generale e Specialistica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 9. Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche, Chirurgiche, Neurologiche, Metaboliche e Geriatriche, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 10. Dipartimento Multidisciplinare di Specialità Medico Chirurgiche ed Odontoiatriche, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Blood transfusion is a lifesaving procedure for patients affected by hematological diseases or hemorrhage risk. AIM: This retrospective study was aimed to evaluate clinical safety of pediatric transfusions by comparing the frequency of adverse events caused by apheretic blood components vs whole blood. METHODS: From 2011 to 2015, 214 patients (blood malignancy patients, n = 144 and thalassemic patients, n = 70) received 12 531 units of blood components. The adverse acute reactions occurred during patient hospitalization were reported to the Hemovigilance system and assessed by fitting a logistic mixed-effect model. RESULTS: A total of 33 (0.3%) adverse acute events occurred. Odds ratio (OR) of adverse events from apheresis vs whole blood transfusion adjusted by patient classification was not statistically significant (OR [95% CI], 0.75 [0.23-2.47]). CONCLUSION: Our findings showed no significant differences in the prevalence of adverse acute events between blood component collected by apheresis vs whole blood in our study center.
INTRODUCTION: Blood transfusion is a lifesaving procedure for patients affected by hematological diseases or hemorrhage risk. AIM: This retrospective study was aimed to evaluate clinical safety of pediatric transfusions by comparing the frequency of adverse events caused by apheretic blood components vs whole blood. METHODS: From 2011 to 2015, 214 patients (blood malignancypatients, n = 144 and thalassemicpatients, n = 70) received 12 531 units of blood components. The adverse acute reactions occurred during patient hospitalization were reported to the Hemovigilance system and assessed by fitting a logistic mixed-effect model. RESULTS: A total of 33 (0.3%) adverse acute events occurred. Odds ratio (OR) of adverse events from apheresis vs whole blood transfusion adjusted by patient classification was not statistically significant (OR [95% CI], 0.75 [0.23-2.47]). CONCLUSION: Our findings showed no significant differences in the prevalence of adverse acute events between blood component collected by apheresis vs whole blood in our study center.